ML20246H495
| ML20246H495 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 08/28/1989 |
| From: | William Cahill TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| TXX-89625, NUDOCS 8909010270 | |
| Download: ML20246H495 (6) | |
Text
h, ;%,N- -
~
W 8
M Log # TXX-89625
+
C Fi1e # 10010 C
C 908.2.
- 'R***(*'
filELECTRIC August 28, 1989' Executive Vke President i tV U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
' Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D.
C.-
20555 i
SUBJECTi ' COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION-(CPSES)
DOCKET NOS.-50-445 AND 50-446 REQUEST FOR ADDITION INFORMATION PERTAINING TO FSAR' CHAPTER 8 REVIEW REF:
1)
NRC letter from Christopher I Grimes to William J.
Cahill, Jr. dated February 16, 1989..
2)
TU' Electric letter to NRC logged TXX-89147, dated March'17. 1989.
Gentlemen:
Reference I requested that TU. Electric "... provide, when available, a comparison of the analytically; derived voltages to the test-results [obtained during preoperational testing] to confirm that the analytical techniques and assumptions used can adequately predict electrical system voltages for expected supply voltage and system loading conditions." Reference 2 provided a schedule for the submittal. is a-summary comparison of the calculation results and test results for the selected engineered safety features (ESF) buses. The voltage and power levels of'the ESF buses were monitored in accordance with start-up test procedures during preoperational testing.. After completion of the test, the measured power flows were used to calculate analytical voltages for.the system. Calculation of the analytical voltages was performed using the,same computer programs that were used to calculate the minimum operating voltages (i.e., voltage profile) at CPSES.
As can be seen from attachment 1, the analytical voltages are more conservative than the measured test voltages.
Therefore, the validity of the mathematical model used in the performance of the voltage profile is established. provides a one-line diagram of the ESF buses measured during the test. These buses were selected based on their having the lowest analyzed voltages in the voltage profile calculation, g9020270 agoggg f
- a ADDCK 05000445-'
f0#l PNU 400 North Olive Street LB BI Dallas, Texas 73201 l
1 TXX-89625 August-28, 1989 Page 2 of 2 The described test procedure and calculation are on file at CPSES.
Sincerely,
/
William J. Cahill, Jr.
WJH/vid Attachments (2) c - Mr. R. D. Martin, Region IV Resident Inspectors, CPSES (3)
___________ a
-l Attach = nt I to TXX-89625 August 28, 1989 Page 1 of 3 RERut TS OFTERT Table ! - Steady State / Motor Prestart CALCULATED TEST BUS VOLTAGE VOLTAGE
% DIFF (Note 1)
Swyd 139.5kV 139.5kV 0
Swgr 1EA2 6869V 6930V 0.9 LC 1EB4 484V 488V 0.8 MCC 1EB4-1 483V 487V 0.8 Pnl 1EC4 120V 121.5V 1.2 Pnl 1EC2 118V 119.1V 0.9 (Test Voltage) - (Calculated Voltage)
Note 1:
Difference (Calculated Voltage) e.
._.i
!i.
. Attachment I to TXX-89625'-
- . August'28, 1989
~
' Page 2 of 3
' Table !! - Motor Start CALCULATED TEST BUS VOLTAGE VOLTAGE
% DIFF (Note 1)
Swyd 138.6kV 139.5kV 0.6 Swgr 1EA2 6667V 6780V 1.7 LC 1EB4 469V 478V 1.9 MCC 1EB4-1 468V 477.6V 2.1 Pnl 1EC4 116V 119V 2.5 Pnl 1EC2 114V 116.7V 2.3 (Test Voltage) - (Calculated Voltage)
Note 1:
Difference (Calculated Voltage)
I 6
k
. Attactcent'l to TXX-89625'
.- August 28, 1989' Page 3 of 3 l
i Table ill - Post Start
-CALCULATED TEST BUS VOLTAGE VOLTAGE WDIFF (Note 1)
(
Swyd 139.5kV 139.5kV 0
Swgr 1EA2 6855V 6918V 0.9 LC 1EB4 483V 487V 0.8 MCC.1EB4-1 482V 486V 0.8 Pnl 1EC4 -
120V 121.4V 1.2 Pnl 1EC2 118V 119V 0.8 (Test Voltage) g(Calculated Voltage)
Note 1:
Difference
=
(Calculated Voltage)
______________________._._-___________..____.___mm_-_.-
([ 4
'2Attachnnt'22to TXX-89625y zu
- August 28;:1989
- g.
+ _ Pag 2. I ' of' 1 -
- ,,. c -
-l 4
136 KV
", em'YSTl e
2EAl 2 E Al -
leal IEAz rn IE'6ff IE B4-l rm IEC4 IEC2.
ONE LINE OF ESFBUSES
'^
t
_. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _